The state of the situation in Europe today is the reason why I am happier flying a desk for an NAA and only flying about 5-15 hours a month, than flying the line. The NAA have been pinched, especially by the current situation so my salary is really only on par with a local FOs, but I have NEVER in my 17 year career had to pay my own type rating and I never will, I get as much time off as I want (and get to take it when I need it), I get to pursue my other work uninterrupted and I do not have to sit right hand seat to a "boy" who has been promoted up to LHS within 2 years of getting his first job.
The article by Schiff really hits home for me. Like Schiff and his son, I have built up experience in many different aircraft types in both RHS and LHS positions, only to find myslef as a redundant piece of bean-counter's dischargable "excess fat".
I know of no-one post 9/11 who has secured a jet job without a current TR. All of the turboprop guys I know who were lucky enough to get an airline sponsorship are now working for enough money to give them the choice between covering their living expenses or covering their loan repayments - not a nice decission to have to make.
Last month a jet SFO came to me with some good news. He had just received a pay rise. After I congratulated him, he told me that he was now earning ALMOST enough to cover the interest on his loans, and now they were only rising by a few tens of Euro each month instead of hundreds.
Of the Captains I know, there are only two types who seem comfortable; those who came into the industry today already qualified (e.g. had started their careers before the early 90s), and those who have come into aviation as a second career and had acrued sufficient wealth in their previous career to fund their training. Of the others the picture is not so clear.
I am not saying that all the perks we used to get in this industry were justified. The extreme of this being FR who I believe make their crews pay for their parking permits. Is the parking permit a right of the aviation worker? I would like to think yes, but in most other industries the answer is no - I can see FR's point. Where I work, transport is not an issue, but in the UK or USA, the car is a lifeline without which it is impossible for a crew to get to work for that 5am start.
Sure, increasing the benefits package for crew would impact on ticket prices, but as yield management is used by almost all airlines these days, it would not necessarily have to impact on the marketing system or the bottom line - Just adjust the break even point in your yield management programme to reflect your greater overhead. Passenger can still have his $10 ticket if he is early enough, while crews can have remuneration and consideration comensurate with the positions they hold and the expense they have faced.
Until such time as the situation changes, I am happy to stay as far away from the line as is humanly possible. Sure, in my current position I am only on a crumby FO salary, but my quality of life has never been better. I would not sell that out to become a slave to a farsical seniority programme. My bed at night, my lifestyle and the integrity of my marriage are all too important to me to sell out for the benefit of a bean-counter. I am one experienced pilot who has been lost to line flying because of this situation, I am sure I am not the only one.
RIX